From the Rolls-Royce experimental archive: a quarter of a million communications from Rolls-Royce, 1906 to 1960's. Documents from the Sir Henry Royce Memorial Foundation (SHRMF).
Choice between Schatz and New Departure bearings with six suggestions for design modification.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 20\7\ Scan058 | |
| Date | 14th February 1928 | |
| DA.{Bernard Day - Chassis Design} from R.{Sir Henry Royce} c. to BJ. Wor.{Arthur Wormald - General Works Manager} BY.{R.W. Bailey - Chief Engineer} Hs.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} 4547 RL/M14.2.28. EAC.10 43807 Re. N.sch.2537, from the experience mentioned it certainly suggests that Schatz bearing is treacherous but I understood that there was no difference in the angle. It was New Departure exactly in principle with one row of balls, but if so, the balls would have to fit the * inner race, or very nearly so. Anyway, for safety and quick progress let us settle on New Departure type. I am not favourable to N.sch. 2537 even for a temporary arrangement: too many diametral fits etc. I suppose it is difficult to find a std. bearing suitable for the space. (1) I suggest that the coupling might lock the ball race nut, (2) that we often use this type of ball bearing with the sheet metal hosuing, (3) that we should like more steel in the races, (4) that I should like to see the inner race fit directly on to the pinion shaft, (5) that I do not understand the pinion being pushed into the wheel 1/10th. of an inch more than the level teeth, and (6) that I fear the bearing would not be oil retaining. We cannot rely on the felt: I have never thought it of permanent use. I do not object to felt, but do not trust it to do more than keep a close fit against water. SEE ORIGINAL FOR SKETCH. Try for something like this i.e. revolving disc to retain oil, shewn as locking plate held up by springs in | ||